Intel Core i5-11500H vs Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-11500H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-11500H boosts to 4.60 GHz, whereas the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 boosts to 3.40 GHz.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-11500H scores 14166 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 2.3% ahead of the Xeon E5-2698B v3's score of 13843.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-11500H does not.

Q: What are the process nodes of each chip?

A: The Intel Core i5-11500H is built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 uses the older 22 nm node.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 provides 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth via quad-channel DDR4, compared to 51.2 GB/s for the dual-channel Intel Core i5-11500H.

Q: Do both processors include integrated graphics?

A: No, only the Intel Core i5-11500H includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750). The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 has no integrated GPU.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is decisive: the Intel Core i5-11500H wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the database, taking all 6 recorded tests. The margins are modest but consistent, with the i5-11500H leading by 2.3% in most multi-core tests and by 2.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core.

For users who prioritize newer architecture, higher clock speeds, integrated graphics, and lower power consumption, the Intel Core i5-11500H is the clear choice. It delivers 2.3% higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23 despite having 10 fewer cores and 20 fewer threads. Its 10 nm process and 35 W TDP make it suited for mobile systems, while its 4.60 GHz boost clock gives it an edge in single-threaded workloads.

The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 is an end-of-life server/workstation part with 16 cores and 32 threads. It offers ECC memory support, quad-channel DDR4 with higher bandwidth (68.3 GB/s), and 40 MB of shared L3 cache. However, the recorded benchmarks show it trailing the i5-11500H in every category. Its 135 W TDP and 22 nm process indicate higher power draw and older manufacturing technology.

The verdict from the data: choose the Intel Core i5-11500H for general productivity, single-threaded tasks, and any workload where newer features like PCIe Gen 4 and integrated graphics matter. Choose the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 only if ECC memory support, quad-channel memory bandwidth, or 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are absolute requirements, and you are willing to accept slightly lower benchmark scores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-11500H wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-11500H scores 1427 versus 1395 for the Xeon, a 2.3% advantage. The single-core result is even more favorable: 201 versus 196, a 2.6% lead.

Cinebench R20 shows the same pattern. The i5-11500H posts 5949 in multi-core against 5814 for the Xeon (2.3% ahead), and 839 versus 820 in single-core (2.3% ahead).

Cinebench R23 repeats the story. The i5-11500H achieves 14166 in multi-core, beating the Xeon's 13843 by 2.3%. In single-core, the i5-11500H scores 1999 versus 1954, again a 2.3% margin.

The Geekbench tests further reinforce the i5-11500H's position. The i5-11500H scores 7135 in Geekbench multi-core and 1778 in single-core. The Xeon E5-2698B v3 has no recorded Geekbench results in the database, so it cannot contest these numbers.

What makes these results notable is that the Xeon has 16 cores and 32 threads, more than double the i5-11500H's 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite this massive core-count disadvantage, the i5-11500H still wins every multi-core test. This is strong evidence that the i5-11500H's newer architecture, higher clocks, and more efficient design more than compensate for its lower core count.

The avgBenchmarkScore metric tells a similar story: the i5-11500H averages 4187 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Xeon averages 4004. Both processors sit at the 57th percentile among all CPUs in the database, but the i5-11500H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900 (0.6% ahead) and Intel Core i5-12500T (0.7% behind), while the Xeon's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655G (0.2% ahead) and Intel Core i5-12400T (0.4% behind).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category.

Cores and threads: The Xeon E5-2698B v3 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The i5-11500H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Clock speeds: The i5-11500H has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Xeon has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz.

TDP: The i5-11500H is rated at 35 W. The Xeon is rated at 135 W.

Socket: The i5-11500H uses Intel BGA 1787. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3.

Process node: The i5-11500H uses 10 nm. The Xeon uses 22 nm.

Die size: The i5-11500H measures 190 mm². The Xeon measures 356 mm² and contains 2,600 million transistors.

Cache: The i5-11500H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 40 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory: Both support DDR4, but the i5-11500H uses a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon supports ECC memory; the i5-11500H does not.

PCIe: The i5-11500H offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics: The i5-11500H includes UHD Graphics 750. The Xeon has none.

Production status: The i5-11500H is active. The Xeon is end-of-life.

Launch MSRP: The i5-11500H launched at $250. The Xeon has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-11500H is built on the Tiger Lake-H architecture, using Intel's 10 nm process. It represents the Core 11th Gen mobile lineup, with a die size of 190 mm². Its 6 cores and 12 threads operate at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost to 4.60 GHz. The architecture supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, dual-channel DDR4 memory, and includes integrated UHD Graphics 750. The 12 MB shared L3 cache is paired with 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core and 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 is built on the Haswell-EP architecture, using Intel's 22 nm process. It is a server/workstation part with a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors. Its 16 cores and 32 threads run at a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and boost to 3.40 GHz. The architecture supports PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes, quad-channel DDR4 memory, and ECC memory. The 40 MB shared L3 cache is paired with 256 KB of L2 cache per core and 64 KB of L1 cache per core.

The architectural gap is significant. Tiger Lake-H is a newer design with a smaller process node, higher clock speeds, and modern I/O features like PCIe Gen 4. Haswell-EP is an older architecture with a larger process node, lower clocks, and PCIe Gen 3. The Xeon compensates with more cores, more cache, and higher memory bandwidth, but the benchmark data shows that the newer architecture wins in every recorded test.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-11500H wins in:

• Every recorded benchmark: all 6 head-to-head tests, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core.
• Single-threaded performance: 2.6% ahead in Cinebench R15 single-core, 2.3% ahead in R20 and R23 single-core.
• Multi-core performance despite fewer cores: 2.3% ahead in all three Cinebench multi-core tests.
• Geekbench: scores 7135 multi-core and 1778 single-core, with no competing Xeon results recorded.
• Power efficiency: 35 W TDP versus 135 W.
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 750 included.
• Modern connectivity: PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.
• Active production status with a recorded launch MSRP of $250.

Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 wins in:

• Core count: 16 cores versus 6.
• Thread count: 32 threads versus 12.
• Cache capacity: 40 MB shared L3 versus 12 MB.
• Memory bandwidth: 68.3 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s via quad-channel DDR4.
• ECC memory support (not available on the i5-11500H).
• PCIe lane count: 40 lanes versus 20, albeit on the older Gen 3 standard.
• Server/workstation market positioning with a larger 356 mm² die and 2,600 million transistors.

The data indicates that the i5-11500H is the stronger performer in every benchmark category recorded, while the Xeon's advantages are confined to specifications that do not translate into benchmark wins: core count, cache size, memory bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe lane count. For workloads that rely on raw multi-threaded rendering or encoding, the i5-11500H still edges out the Xeon by 2.3%, which is a remarkable result given the Xeon's 16-core design. For workloads that require ECC memory, very high memory bandwidth, or many PCIe lanes, the Xeon may still be relevant despite its lower benchmark scores.